In this recent IVO (Intervention Order) case, I represented the Respondent, who firmly maintained that the allegations made against her were unfounded and completely fabricated. The Applicant had issued an Application for an Intervention Order (IVO) alleging harassment, stalking, and property damage to his vehicle, and claimed the parties had been separated for three and a half years.
Background to the IVO Application
According to the Respondent, the Applicant’s true intention in filing the IVO was to remain in Australia on a visa by using family violence allegations as leverage.
He alleged that the Respondent:
- Harassed and stalked him
- Damaged his vehicle while driving
- Stalked him on Facebook
The Respondent consistently denied all allegations, stating she had not seen him for three and a half years, did not damage his vehicle, and did not stalk him online.
Contradictions in the Applicant’s Story
Crucially, the Applicant appeared to “forget” that years earlier he had sent the Respondent a litany of abusive and derogatory text messages and emails. Those messages were clearly worded as a permanent goodbye. After that, the Respondent moved on with her life and later married.
These prior communications contradicted his version of events and undermined the credibility of his IVO allegations.
Carmella’s Preparation and Strategy
In preparation for the IVO hearing, I advised the Respondent to provide:
- Strong alibi evidence
- Character references
- Copies of past texts and emails showing contradictions
- Any material suggesting possible third-party interference
There were obvious inconsistencies between the Applicant’s IVO claims and his own abusive messages sent years earlier. We carefully organised this evidence to highlight the unreliable nature of his allegations.
Court Attendance – Or Lack Thereof
On the day of the IVO hearing, the Applicant failed to appear at:
- 10:00 am
- 11:00 am
- 12:00 noon
This was despite the new court location being clearly and widely publicised. His non-appearance, combined with the contradictions in his material, spoke volumes.
Outcome: IVO Application Struck Out
Given the Applicant’s failure to attend and the serious doubts about his evidence, I sought a strike-out of the IVO Application.
The Magistrate agreed and struck out the Application due to his non-appearance.
✅ Justice served
✅ Case closed
Client Guidance Moving Forward
For the Respondent, the key guidance after the IVO was struck out was:
- Focus forward and avoid looking back
- Have no contact with the Applicant
- Maintain situational awareness at all times
- Be vigilant and think critically when choosing a future partner
Most importantly: you don’t have to put up with abusive or manipulative behaviour.
Takeaway: Are IVO Allegations Taken Seriously by the Court?
Question: Are allegations made in an Application for an Intervention Order (IVO) taken seriously by the court?
Answer: Yes. Allegations made in an Application for an Intervention Order (IVO) are taken very seriously by the court, particularly because IVOs are designed to:
- Protect the affected person and any children from potential harm
- Ensure their safety
- Preserve property
Even if allegations later prove to be false, exaggerated, or are ultimately struck out (as in this case), the court must treat them as genuine at the outset. This approach is consistent with the protective purpose of IVOs and the principles underlying Section 52A of the Family Violence Protection Act (FVPA).
If you are a respondent to an IVO and need advice, contact
Domestic Family Violence Lawyers for clear, practical legal guidance.
For general information about intervention orders in Victoria, visit the
Magistrates’ Court of Victoria intervention orders page.
